• WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    And on the other hand there are a bunch of inefficiencies because a department is underfunded and understaffed.

    But mostly cutting means people depending on the services get less. That’s a lot of fun with tornado warnings and air traffic control.

    • Delphia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Yeah it all falls under the same umbrella really.

      It could be done smartly by experts with actual input from the people that have been begging for improvements and complaining about redundant policies and antiquated systems for decades. But no… lets use expensive external “experts” who understand nothing and will make more problems than they solve and cost more while they do it.

      • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s not a government problem per se. Same happens in private businesses. Somebody gets an incentive to bring down payroll. Internal expertise gets chucked out and external people come in. A bonus is given to the manager for reducing headcount. Costs on external people goes up explosively. Incentive for infernal expertise gets created. It’s a fun cycle if you’re there at the right moment.

    • JollyBrancher @lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      As painful as government beurocracy can feel, it’s always been a better experience for me than trying to get anything fixed or have a reliable point of contact with a massive private company. The worst part is how processes can be jerked about because Congress and some administrations just don’t care or understand how things are for civilian (and I would guess enlisted) employees. I only worked over the second Obama and first Trump admin, which was enough to make me leave. I’d hate to be in there now.